COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in dangerous drugs and admitted the Summary of Facts in the committal proceedings at the Eastern Magistracy on 5 September 2024. The case was then committed to the Court of First Instance for sentence. Before this court, she confirmed her plea and her agreement to the Summary of Facts through counsel.
The particulars of the charge state that on 3 February 2023 at Flat D, 27th Floor, Gardenia, No. 468 Sai Yeung Choi Street North, Sham Shui Po, Kowloon, in Hong Kong, the defendant unlawfully trafficked in dangerous drugs, namely, 16.3 grammes of a solid containing 14.5 grammes of cocaine and 6.51 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 6.47 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride, commonly called ‘Ice’.
The Summary of Facts admitted by the defendant provides, inter alia, as follows. In the evening of 3 February 2023, police officers laid ambush at the staircase near Flat D, 27th Floor, Gardenia, No. 468 Sai Yeung Choi Street North, Sham Shui Po (“the Flat”). At around 10 pm, police officers spotted the defendant acting furtively when she left the Flat and thus immediately intercepted the defendant for inquiry.
Upon search, drugs and cash were found inside the defendant’s sling bag, including:
(1) a resealable plastic bag containing 16.3 grammes of a solid containing 14.5 grammes of cocaine;
(2) a resealable plastic bag containing 6.51 grammes of a crystalline solid containing 6.47 grammes of methamphetamine hydrochloride; and
(3) cash of HK$10,000.
The defendant was arrested. Under caution, the defendant stated that the ‘Ice’ and the cocaine were to be delivered by her to someone in Mong Kok with a reward of HK$1,000.
A video-recorded interview was conducted with the defendant on 4 February 2023. Under caution, the defendant stated, inter alia, the following:
(1) the drugs found in her sling bag belonged to her;
(2) she would receive a remuneration of HK$1,000 after the dangerous drugs were delivered to someone in Mong Kok as instructed, but she has not yet received the payment;
(3) she did not know the person who gave her the drugs;
(4) she did not know the person whom she would deliver the drug to;
(5) the cash of HK$10,000 found on her were money that she earned by working as a salesperson;
(6) she had the habit of consuming ‘Ice’ and cocaine;
The estimated street value of the cocaine seized is HK$12,861 (in powder form) or HK$16,756 (in crack form), whereas that of the ‘Ice’ seized is HK$3,164.
The defendant is 52 years of age and she has a son aged 20. She has received education up to Form 3 level. She was a salesperson at the time of arrest.
The defendant has 13 previous convictions, two of which are drug related. The defendant was convicted of possession of dangerous drug in 1994 and 1996. She was respectively fined and put on probation for 24 months.
The sentencing approach for the offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug is laid down in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290, which is further clarified in HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] 1 HKLRD 1186. The first step is to identify the relevant sentencing band (or bracket) applicable to the quantity of drug concerned. The second step is an assessment of the role and culpability of the defendant based on the evidence before the court. The third step is to identify where in the relevant band of the guidelines the defendant comes. It may be necessary to go outside the band to reflect the particular circumstances of the offence and the role of the defendant. The fourth step is to consider aggravating factors which bear on the “notional sentence after trial”. The fifth step is to have regard to any matters of mitigation, bearing in mind that personal circumstances will count for little unless they are exceptional. The sixth and final step is for the judge to stand back and look at the overall sentence passed in order to ensure that it is a “fair, just, and balanced sentence”.
Regarding the first step, the task is to identify the appropriate range applicable to the quantity of drugs concerned. In HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] HKCA 234, the guideline for a quantity of 14.5 grammes of cocaine is 5 years and 4 months’ imprisonment as the starting point. According to the same case, the guideline for a quantity of 6.47 grammes of ‘Ice’ is 5 years and 7 months as the starting point.
As two different kinds of drugs were involved with a combined weight of 20.97 grammes, in order to assist me in identifying the starting point of the offence, the defence counsel has conducted the “Absurdity Test”, “Ratio Test” and “Conversion Test” as explained in HKSAR v Chan Yuk Leong, CACC 318/2013 (Judgment dated 8 April 2014), with the following results: 7 years and 8.8 months under the Absurdity Test, 6 years and 4.9 months under the Ratio Test, and 7 years and 1.9 months under the Conversion Test.
Having considered the above results in the round and taking into account that more than one type of dangerous drug is involved, I consider that the starting point of 7 years would be appropriate in the present case. That is purely based on the quantity and types of drugs involved, before any consideration of the defendant’s role in the offence.
Second, concerning the defendant’s role and culpability, I accept that the defendant was a courier of the drugs. As admitted by the defendant, her role was to deliver the drugs in question to someone in Mong Kok for a reward of HK$1,000.
Third, in view of my aforesaid finding of the defendant’s role and culpability, I consider that 7 years would be appropriate notional sentence after trial for the offence in question.
Fourth, I consider that there is no aggravating feature which would enhance the notional sentence after trial.
Fifth, I consider that the only mitigating factor which may reduce the defendant’s sentence is her timely plea, for which I will give her a one-third discount. Accordingly, the defendant’s sentence is reduced to 4 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.
I shall not give a discount on account of the fact that the defendant was herself addicted to ‘Ice’. Cases like HKSAR v Wong Suet Hau [2002] 1 HKLRD 69 concern the situation where a defendant suggests that a part of the drugs seized was for the defendant’s own consumption. This is clearly not the situation in the present case. The defendant has clearly admitted that the whole of the drugs was to be delivered to someone in Mong Kok.
Finally, I consider that the sentence of 4 years and 8 months’ imprisonment is a fair, just, and balanced sentence.
Accordingly, the defendant you are sentenced to 4 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.